|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
perception, since it is devoid of form, etc. And it is not subject to inference, since it is devoid of all grounds of inference, etc. But like the religious acts (producing virtue), this entity is known from the scriptures alone . . . Mere empty logic cannot find any scope here; only logic conformed to the upanisads is resorted to here as a subsidiary means of realization. (UMS II.1.6)
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Second, the reasoning of the uneducated person is notoriously unreliable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One should not on the strength of reasoning alone challenge something that must be known from the scriptures. Reasoning that has no scriptural foundation and springs from the mere musings of the human mind lacks conclusiveness; for such musings are uncontrolled. Thus we see that an argument discovered with great effort by experts is falsified by other experts; and an argument hit upon by the latter is proved to be hollow by still others. So nobody can rely on argument as conclusive, since the human mind is so variable in its ways. (UMS II.1.11)59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Third, we all know that "reasonable argumentation" never lead to a definitively right viewpoint: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. . . Although reasoning may be noticed to have foundations regarding some topics, in the present context it cannot possibly be immune to the charge of inconclusiveness; for this extremely sublime subject-matter, concerned with the true nature of being, the basis of liberation, cannot even be guessed at without the help of the scriptures . . . (UMS II.1.11)60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brahman is an objective extra- and posttextual reality; legitimate, upanisadic statements about Brahman do not contradict properly exercised reason. But Brahman is beyond reason's grasp in the sense that it places before reason truths it cannot combine into a single, overarching explanation; reason may recognize various points correctly, but never reaches a vantage point from which to envision the whole. The purpose of argument is to show that there are no reasonable grounds for seeking an explanation of the whole other than that indicated by the upanisads. |
|
|
|
|
|